In my uni, students often don't even need a medical diagnosis to get certain accommodations.
This has created a kind of symbiosis between the wellbeing officers who make careers off of many students needing accommodations, and fit and healthy students who get academic advantages from being "diagnosed" disabled.
There are obviously students with genuine needs, and the wellbeing people are usually very nice and extremely empathic and caring. So you end up looking like a cruel asshole when you try to point out the perverse incentives within this system.
> The reason, they believe, is that as warm air rises over the sea, it draws moisture away from the land, yielding heavier downpours.
Without reading the original article, which probably goes into more detail, I find this very speculative and I'm not convinced there is more going on than correlation. If anything the causality is more plausible the other way round: When it doesn't rain over land, pollution spikes.
Some parts of the dead mice still emit in that spectrum. There won't be a clear and distinct "the lights went out" moment but a gradual fading, so you'll have to define some threshold to translate from radiation distribution and intensity do dead/alive. I don't think an image of photon emission will help pronounce someone dead.
Beta is dimensionless, in terms of standard deviations. In their results tables, you can find their unit versions under the column "B". These lie in the centers of the CIs, as expected.
[the slideshow] was missing important tested material, repetitive, and just totally airy and meaningless. Just slide after slide of the same handful of sentences rephrased with random loosely related stock photos.
Who cares if he saved himself some time when he completely wasted everyone else's time?
I think the real problems are that knowing when to use something appropriately and holding yourself honestly to that are pretty difficult for most people.
If I had a choice about whether to give the presentation, I would choose not to. If you had a choice about whether to attend it, you would also choose not to. But, alas, both of us are there -- such is the way of the large bureaucracy.
No, if you can type in a prompt, just email me the prompt so I know what you intended. I don't need the slop the AI came up with, thank you.
I already feel disrespected in powerpoint presentations where they clearly haven't practiced it for a long time and seem to be discovering the slides and coming up with the argument they want to make on the spot. I usually get up and leave.
Positron looks like the next version of Rstudio, which is currently free. Do you think the plan is to phase out support for the free product and push users into the paid one?
Positron inherits many ideas from RStudio, but is a separate project with an intentionally different set of tradeoffs; it gains multi-language/multi-session support, better configuration/extensibility, etc. but at the expense of RStudio's simplicity and support for many R-only workflows.
We're still investing in RStudio and while the products have some overlap there's no attempt to convert people from one to the other.
I am talking about the RStudio Server and Connect - these are really expensive. One of the sales reps claimed that it is so expensive because they are a PBC and support open-source development. As in if they were just for profit it would be cheaper, but we should feel good about paying more. I could not take it.
As an admin and advocate for Posit Teams, Connect and Server filled a niche where a single admin could spin up infra and allow for anything deployable by end users without having to worry about scaling.
It paid for itself in terms of scientists spinning up their own projects without having to provision server hardware, VMs, or anything else.
If you take advantage of all the featuers in Teams, perhaps. But we needed a tiny bit from Workbench, a little bit from Connect, and sliver from Package Manager - and Teans ended up eating a huge portion of our IT bill, effectively stunting our efficiency as a research organization. Over the years, while our use case did not change, our Posit bill more than doubled.
Impressive. However, I don't like how AI foundation models are always advertised as alternatives to "traditional" (physics based) forecasting. Virtually all AI weather models are trained on ERA5 reanalysis, which is a blend of observations and numerical model forecasts. Without a good global numerical model of the atmosphere there would be no AI model. I wish this synergy were emphasised more, rather than always going straight for the easy "AI beats physics!!1!" headline.
Things are changing quickly in this area. Several projects/companies working on AI data assimilation (an alternative route to creating analysis data like ERA5)[0].
Also a lot of companies working on the data collection side, replacing/augmenting government data collection. Spire's an example of this in the space domain, and Windborne and Sorcerer (my company) do weather balloons.
I agree… the public and leaders need to know how the training data is generated: a combination of sensors and physics-based simulation models. Lacking this context could lead to poor decisions around research prioritization and funding.
Funny to see this on the front page. When my son was a baby, I carried him in a sling and got my morning coffee from Christophe in the coop next door. Every day he greeted me with "It's the tired kangaroo man!"
This has created a kind of symbiosis between the wellbeing officers who make careers off of many students needing accommodations, and fit and healthy students who get academic advantages from being "diagnosed" disabled.
There are obviously students with genuine needs, and the wellbeing people are usually very nice and extremely empathic and caring. So you end up looking like a cruel asshole when you try to point out the perverse incentives within this system.
It's perfect.
reply